Does Active D lighting change the exposure?

<p>Will the Active D lighting set to "on" cause the exposures to be inconsistant under studio lighting? I'm getting about one stop under at times depending on the subjects skin color shade. I re-metered several times and am getting a consitent F8. I'm using paul buff white lightenings , bounced out of umbrellas.</p>

<p>How are you metering? With a grey card or flashmeter? Is the meter calibrated against the camera? Active D lighting may give inconsistant exposures if the composition varies, but I would have thought it'd be over exposure.</p>

<p>Yes; I do not know for sure under studio lights (never used those), but in daylight, you get an exposure about 1/3rd or 2/3rd of a stop less.<br>

If you use in-camera JPEG, ADL has effect. If you use Nikon software to develop RAW, ADL will have the desired effect (and/or can be turned off). If you use 3rd party software for RAW, ADL has a negative effect since it effectively underexposes, increasing your risk of noise.</p>

<p>Yes it can. It's intended to preserve highlights when shooting JPGs. It does it by dropping the base exposure and then bringing up the shadows. It shouldn't be used when shooting RAW, or necessary in a controlled studio setting.</p>

<p>I'm using a flash meter that I tested out against the camera in my home. It tested out perfectally.</p>

<p>I just bought the camera and didn't realize that Nikon set the default on the Active D setting to "on". </p>

You can turn it off. It causes underexposure to prevent blown highlights, and only helps under certain circumstances

and only when using Nikon branded software. With your own metering and a lighting rig I wouldn't use it.

<p>If you are using an external meter, use manual exposure and check that ISO is not in AUTO mode (besides setting ADL off, as previous posters said)</p>

<p>Although the common thought is that the exposure changes, I recently did a test and found no exposure difference in my test shots and basically no difference in the histograms when opening the files with non-Nikon software (with Nikon software, there is a difference). I have and continue to shoot with it off. If you are shooting RAW and not using Nikon software like NX, there is no advantage to using the feature.</p>

<p>Exposure may change since ADL basically works by underexposing to protect the highlights and then applying a tone curve to lift the shadows when generating the Jpeg or in Post processing when using a Nik software (no other change than exposure to the RAW file).</p>

<p>The amount of underexposure depends on the ADL setting (high / normal / low) and the Matrix meter evaluation.</p>

 

<p>Whether, or how much, the exposure changes depends on the scene and the ADL setting (I'm using a D7000 (there are 5 settings besides off).</p>

<p>ADL moves your zero meter reading in all but the Low setting. Each progressively more aggressive setting moves it until it is ultimately changed by a full stop on extra high. Thom Hogan puts the exact numbers in his D90 manual, I think they are probably in the D7000 manual as well.</p>

<p>If you want this feature but want the true meter reading keep it on Low.</p>

 

<p>Here's Nikons explanation.. :<br>

<a href="http://imaging.nikon.com/lineup/microsite/d-technology/expeed/d_lighting/index.htm">http://imaging.nikon.com/lineup/microsite/d-technology/expeed/d_lighting/index.htm</a></p>

<p>Here are the comparison shots I took recently. These were shot with the D3. The exposures were all identical - ISO 200, 1/250, f5.6. These were RAW and converted to JPGs with View NX2 with no additional processing. When opened with non-Nikon softare (I use DXO), all 4 files look the identical to the photo with the feature OFF.</p><div></div>

<p>You've got very bright and very dark spread through out the frame. Try something like 1/3 frame is bright sky with lots of clouds with some blue patches and the rest of the frame in shadows.</p>

<p>Right now, it looks like you're trying to prove the earth is flat.</p>

<p>Elliot, have you compared the results you get with DXO lighting? It supposedly should perform something similar.</p>

<p>Bruce, I have done other tests with scenery with basically the same results - improved highlights with basically the exposure not changing or not changing by much. I guess the world is flat after all! FWIW, I did this during a break at a shoot about a month ago at an arena when I didn't have much else to do. I did it for myself only at the time.</p>

<p>The differences in the photos are actually a lot more visible than what you can see here in the small pictures. But I was actually quite surprised how the exposure did not change [at all with these photos], which was the point of my test when I did it - I wanted to see how much it changed and how the photos were effected.. The results look just like they would if I had processed them with DXO Lighting or with Photoshop Fill Light control. So, as I have done before the test, I continue to leave the feature off and correct during post processing.</p><div></div>

<p>Here is another set of test shots I did a short time after I did the above as it had peaked my interest...</p><div></div>

<p>2nd Shot for comparison.</p><div></div>

<p>The exposure changed from f4.8, 1/100, ISO 400 with ADL off to f5.6, 1/125, ISO 400 with it on. </p>

<p>I get better results with 3rd party software. Your results may vary.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Bruce said:<br>

It shouldn't be used when shooting RAW, or necessary in a controlled studio setting.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I don't have experienced it in a controlled studio setting but concerning RAW I would say that, specially if you use Nikon NX2.<br>

As a matter of fact Nikon indicates (and that is correct) that you only can profit from DL adjustments if the file was shot with DL on (at least using the lower level), otherwise NX2 will not activate the commands. Using the D700 "low" doesn't seem to have a big effect on exposure and leaves you the option to use the adjustments during PP.</p>

<p>If I'm not mistaken, D-lighting only changes your exposure on the higher settings. If you use D-lighting: Auto, it will occassionally chose to use the higher settings (thus affecting your exposure) and not tell you.</p>

<p>I like to think of it like an automated Zone system. Like the Zone system, it's extremely useful at times, and gives you a super-low contrast, weird-looking image if used when it shouldn't be.</p>

<p>My personal opinion is that if you want more shadow detail in a studio situation, you should light for more shadow detail. The rule with studio lighting (with film or digital) is that you should process as neutrally as possible, and use the lights to control contrast. Using d-lighting or a low-contrast developer will occassionally (but not always) introduce unwanted artifacts or effects; so there's no use involving another 'thing' when you have all you need to control contrast in front of you anyway.</p>

<p>Elliot, I'm very curious. Does it just change your exposure values in an AE mode? Or does it also change the meter reading?</p>

<p>Phrased another way, if I'm using the camera's matrix metering, in manual exposure mode, and I set the exposure to exactly zero-out the meter, will I have a different exposure with ADL off verses on?</p>

<p>Dan - The answer to your question is yes. Your zero with ADL set to anything other than low, will actually be different than your zero without ADL on (or on zero). Your camera will be changing where zero is without telling you. That is precisely why I don't use it, or only use it on low. I want to know where the meter is actually reading my exposure especially if I am shooting raw + jpg. It's altering the exposure I think I'm metering for in my raw file.</p>

<p>The whole thing is a bit maddening, because I have never gotten an precise answer about whether the raw file's curve is being altered at the camera level. If so, that is not really what I'm looking for if I'm importing to Lightroom (which is what I do) instead of a Nikon product. Lightroom probably won't interpret those changes properly.</p>

<p>Thom Hogan (who I believe knows the most on the subject) stated the following:</p>

<p>Thom writes - "If your workflow is to shoot raw and process in Lightroom, then you shouldn’t have Active D-Lighting turned on. Indeed, you should probably be clearing out as many camera settings as possible (use Neutral, maybe with –1 contrast). Active D-Lighting doesn’t change raw data directly, but if it shifts exposure—and it always will if flash is active—then you aren’t getting an optimal exposure. But further, if you look at the histograms produced when Active D-Lighting is active and use that to judge exposure, you’re being completely mislead, as the histograms are produced by the embedded JPEG (that’s one reason why I say get rid of camera settings; in fact, it’s why many of us use something called UniWB)."<br /> <br />Question posed to Thom from a Reader - "To clarify; if I shot everything with Active D-Lighting in the Low Setting and no flash, will my .NEF files be any different than if the Active D-Lighting was off? There is no exposure shift, but did it change any other characteristic of the file?"</p>

<p>Thom Replies - "Probably not, but no 100% guarantee."<br /> <br /><br /> <br />That about sums it up. I think the same issues hold true for Picture controls settings - It's unclear whether those settings affect the raw file. They technically shouldn't, but I think they might.</p>

<p>Ideally, I want to shoot Raw + JPG with say portrait and normal active D-lighting to see what Nikon things the JPG's should look like, but still have a completely neutral RAW file to work on and get my own interpretation of the image, but I just don't know if those picture control and ADL settings are altering my Raw file. I think the answer is yes (at least for the ADL exposure shift, but possibly other settings as well).</p>

<p>I videoland, Sony broadcast cameras have a "DCC" switch, which stands for "Dynamic Contrast Control." Turning DCC "on," engages a knee circuit which affects the camera's characteristic curve, gently rolling off highlights of up "600%," according to Sony documentation. In high-contrast scenes, turning DCC "on," can rein in about 1.5 stops of overexposure.</p>

<p>I don't know, but I can only guess that Nikon's Active-D algorithm is performing a similar process. In that it's automatically generating a lower-gamma, softer knee-ed characteristic curve, directing the in-camera generated .JPG to follow these "corrections." It's not clear whether the RAW file is affected, but by following this logic, it would seem, not, since the RAW file's characteristic curve is generated during conversion.</p>